• 1. An Historical Analysis of Romans 1:26-Heterogenital or Homogenital?
• 2. A Grammatical Analysis of Romans 1: Homosexuality or Pagan Sex Rituals?
• 3. Jewish Background for Paul's Anti-Sexual References

II. Paul vs. the Goddess Religions

• 1. The Goddess Religions
• 2. Galli
  • A. Cross-Gender Behavior, Festivals and Self-Castration
  • B. Homogenitality, Female Galli and Phalli
  • C. Animal Imagery
• 3. Early Christians the Bible and the Mother Goddess

Endnotes

1. An Historical Analysis of Romans 1:26-Heterogenital or Homogenital?1

Romans 1:18-32 is one of the primary Christian texts used to condemn homosexuality. In contemporary theology it is the only passage interpreted to referring to female homosexuality. This, however, has not always been the standard interpretation of this passage.² Some early church leaders interpreted this passage to refer not to female homogenitality, but to non-procreative, heterosexual acts. Clement of Alexandria is one example:

Another early Christian writer, Anastasios, summarily dismisses the view that Paul was referring to female-female homogenital acts in his comments on Rom 1:26: "Clearly they (the females referred to in Rom 1:26) do not go into one another, but rather offer themselves to the men."³

Augustine also holds a non-homogenital view of this passage, concluding that Paul was referring to non-procreative, heterosexual intercourse.

Another early text, from the Apocalypse of Peter (2nd century CE) shows us that heterosexual non-procreative sex, not lesbianism, was typically paired with male homosexuality in discussions of the subject. While Brooten believes the female sexual reference in this text is describing female homogenitality, I believe the more parsimonious interpretation arrives at the conclusion she attempts to disprove. There are two primary received texts of this work: the Ethiopic fragment, and the Greek fragment. Brooten uses the Greek fragment, the reading of which seems to be clearly talking about female homogenitality, but she admits that most scholars believe the Ethiopic fragment is closer to the original. It is the Ethiopic fragment which pairs male homogenitality with heterosexual non-procreative acts. It describes the punishment that Peter sees in hell for those men and women who engage in these sexually aberrant and idolatrous behaviors.⁴

The reference to the idols made in the image of animals and reptiles, together with the description of male homogenitality and the female sexual reference is reminiscent of the Romans 1 passage. One of the relevant aspects of this passage is the cryptic reference to the men who have "cut their flesh ... and the women that were with them." This reference may very well be describing a unique ritual of the goddess cults.

My contention in this paper is that the Romans 1:26-27 reference to sexuality is specifically a reference to the gender/sexuality transgressions of the participants in the goddess religions. One of the unique features of this religion is that the male priests (galli) were widely believed to castrate themselves as part of their sacred rituals. Further, as a means of gender transcendence, female worshippers were believed to use artificial phalli in ritualistic sex acts with these castrated priests, as well has having the castrated priests engage in sexual acts with the male worshippers. The above reference in the Apocalypse of Peter would certainly meet the criteria for this context and the similarities between this and the Romans 1 passage strengthens the argument that I will make in the body of this paper.

One of the primary problems in trying to understand Romans 1 is that in addition to the structural complexity of the passage, there is an uncertainty in the meaning of certain phrases in the text, such as "exchanged natural relations for unnatural" (para fusin, 26b). The modern reader, who may be enculturated to read these verses as a clear reference to all homogenital acts, might read an inherent relationship between the words "unnatural" and "homosexual" that the ancient writer probably did not intend. For example, the phrase para fusin?("unnatural") could, in other sexually related contexts, refer to sex with a barren or pregnant woman, sex with a menstruating woman, pederasty or sex between animals of different species. These contexts are tied together by the understanding of many popular Jewish and Greek thinkers that described the purpose of sex as solely for procreation.⁵

This is not to say that Paul was necessarily bringing a procreationist understanding of the phrase to this passage. It is merely to emphasize that it is easy to read modern linguistic assumptions back into the text, which we must be careful not to do. It is instructive to note that Paul didn't see an inherent evil contained in the phrase para fusin (as the modern reader might), for we later see him describing God as acting para fusin by grafting Gentiles into God's soteriological tree (Rom 11:23-24).⁶ Regardless of Paul's intended use of para fusin, there is evidence to suggest that the actions and people described in Romans 1:26b may not be two women involved in homogenital acts. There was certainly no consensus for that interpretation in the early church, there is little literary precedent for the pairing of female and male homogenital acts in the writings of the time and the common usage of para fusin in a sexual context tended to imply a male participant.

2. A Grammatical Analysis of Romans 1: Homosexuality or Pagan Sex Rituals?

The primary pattern of Rom 1:18-32 is the use of the phrases "they exchanged" (met/hlaxan vs 23, 25, 26b) and "God gave them over" (paradwken; vs 24, 26a, 28), which enclose three parallel thoughts between verses 23-28. Parallelism is extremely common in Hebrew and Greek literature, and involves repeating a thought in a different way for emphasis.7 Paul would have been very familiar with this device for emphasis, and it seems clear from the structure of this passage that Paul is using it to emphasize God's wrath against the sin of idolatry.⁸ He begins in verses 18-20 by showing the readers that there is some part of God's character ("His eternal power and divine nature") that can be seen in creation itself, apart from the special revelation found in His Scriptures. Thus, even Gentiles are without excuse.

We are told that these Gentiles knew God from creation, however "they neither glorified Him as God, nor gave thanks to Him" (v. 21). Though at one time they knew God (v. 21), they ended up in the position that they "did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God" (v. 28). Paul shows us in this chapter that there is a linear progression that begins with failing to glorify God as God, followed by abandoning the concept of God, which subsequently leads to various sinful behaviors (murder, etc) as described in the last several verses of the chapter (29-31). Finally, we see that while somehow these Gentiles knew the laws of God, and knew that breaking these laws deserve death, they not only practiced these behaviors, but approved of others who did the same (v. 32).

The primary focus of the chapter is on Gentiles who stop worshipping God, and who "exchange/substitute" (met/hllaxan) the worship of God for the worship of idols. While one could easily postulate that the idolatry substitution could extend metaphorically to anything that takes one's focus off of God (philosophies, unrelenting schedules, religiosity, addictions, etc.), Paul's language seems to limit us specifically to explicit idol worship. Both of the first two parallel passages (vs 23-24, 25-26a), which are clearly bracketed by the repeated phrases "they exchanged"⁹ and "God gave them over,"¹⁰ very graphically describe idol worship as it would have been found in Greco-Roman pagan rituals at the time of Paul's writing.

The third parallel is similarly bracketed with the words methllaxan and paradwken, but does not, at first glance, appear to follow the pattern of the first two parts. As in the first two, we see that God has given them over to wicked behavior (v. 28). However, in both of the first two parts we see that what they exchanged for God were clearly idolatrous behaviors, while in the third part, we see only sexual behaviors exchanged/substituted. This is the primary structural difficulty with this text. If one assumes that the things being exchanged in verses 23 and 25 are metaphors for anything that draw us away from God, it is then easy to say that the sexual behaviors described in verses 26b-27 could describe general homogenital behavior. However, it seems like a poor handling of the text to allow for such a metaphorical interpretation, when the texts are so explicitly concrete in their description of pagan idolatry ("images made to look like mortal man", "worshipped and served created things"). In the same way, in order to preserve the symmetry of the parallel verses, it is safest to suppose that the third parallel refers specifically to pagan rituals. The fact that homogenitality is described in this context is logical when placed in the cultural setting where homogenital "sacred sex" was commonly associated with certain pagan rituals.¹¹ Thus, taking this interpretation of Romans 1:26b-27 preserves the symmetry inherent in the text.

Some have argued against this interpretation of three parallel accounts of pagan rituals, claiming that only the first two clauses speak to this issue. The third clause turns the line of reasoning away from ritual practices to all sinful behavior, and that homosexuality represents an archetype of sin that the Jewish and Roman readers of the letter would see as one of the worst possible sins (an argument that is poorly supported, given the sparse mention of homosexuality, especially lesbianism, in the Jewish Testament and in Rabbinic writings). The argument continues that Paul finishes his thought in verses 29-31, providing a larger sin-list,¹² of which homosexuality is merely the first, separated by verse 28, a description of what God has to do when confronted with unrepentant sinners. Interpreted this way, the third clause, verses 26b-28, does not represent ritual idolatry, but represents all sins, and thus Paul's reference to homogenitality would not be interpreted to be limited to pagan temple prostitution.¹³

However, the grammar of the passage prevents that interpretation as described by Chamberlain.¹⁴ First, kai kaqwV? found in verse 28 (translated as 'since' in the NIV)¹⁵ separates the previous discussion from the discussion that follows it, making the homogenital behavior listed in verses 26b-28 part of a different clause than the sin-list in verses 29-32. Chamberlain explains that kaqos here takes a causal meaning: "Sometimes, it seems to shade off into the causal idea [quotes Rom 1:28 in Greek], 'because they did not approve having God in (their) knowledge God gave them up to a reprobate mind,'" ¹⁶

Second, Chamberlain discusses the verb translated 'to do' in verse 28: "When it explains a verb, it is called the epexegetical infinitive: poiein?(Rom 1.28), 'to do' (the things that are unseemly), explains what Paul means by paredwken autouV o qeoV eiV adokimon nouV? 'God gave them up to a reprobate mind.' The list of unseemly acts follows." ¹⁷ This gives the following paraphrased rendering of verse 28: "And because of the fact that (kai kaqwV) they stopped believing in God, He gave them over (paradwken) to a worthless mind, to do (poiein) evil things, as listed in the following verses."¹⁸

Thus, the acts listed in verses 26b-27 (which are the pagan homogenital "sacred sex" acts) are part of the ultimate cause of God giving them over, not the result of God giving them over. This makes them clearly separate from the acts listed in verses 29-31, which are the result of God having given them over, and not the cause. Having grammatically separated what is cause and what is result in this passage, one can see that the homogenital acts must be separate entities from the sin-list and therefore are intended to be interpreted in the context of the three-clause, metallaxan/paradwken system, not part of the sin-list.

Table 1: Summary of the Three Parallels found in Rom 1:23-31
Outline	23a-24	25-26a	26b-31
What they exchanged (met/hllaxan):	God's glory (23a)	God's truth for a lie (25a)	natural relations for unnatural (26b)
Which led them to do the following:	make images of animals and men to worship (23b)	worship created things (25b)	stop believing in God (28a)
Which led God to give them over to (paradwken) the following:	sinful desires/sexual impurity/degrading their bodies (24)	shameful lusts (26a)	a depraved mind, to do evil things (28b-31)

Within the first two parallels, we see that God gave them over to evil behaviors because of certain actions they took ("exchanging the glory of God for images", and then worshipping and serving created things rather than the creator). However, God did not give them over because of the exchange itself, but because of actions taken as a result of the exchange (in the second parallel, they have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, but the resulting action is that they "worshipped and served created things"). In the third parallel, they exchanged natural relations (fusikhn chrhsin) for those that are against nature (para fusin) as described in verses 26b-27. However, it was not those exchanges that caused God to give them over. Those exchanges resulted in the action of verse 28, "they did not think it worthwhile to retain a knowledge of God", which is what caused God to give them over. It was not the sexual behavior that caused God to give them over, but it was the fact that they abandoned their belief in God that caused Him to give them over. The pagan sexual behavior was a key part of the process of their rejection of their belief in God, just as making idols and worshipping/serving idols was a key part of the process in verses 23-26a.

3. Jewish Background for Paul's Anti-Sexual References

Some may argue that the background for Paul's condemnations of homosexuality (both in Rom 1 and in 1 Co 6:9) are based on the Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 prohibitions on male-male homosexuality and it is in that light that we should read the Romans and 1 Corinthians prohibitions. However, even if Paul was grounding his statements in the Leviticus passages, he still may have been referring to cultic sexual practices. 19 Evidence suggests that ritualistic sexual practices faced by the early Christians were similar to those faced by the early Israelites.

There are several references to sacred prostitution in Scripture. Most of the clear references to the nature of the sexuality come from the Jewish Testament. In most of these cases, the references describe the vdq, the male "holy ones" (Deut 23:17, 1 Kgs 14:24, 1 Kgs 15:12, Kgs 22:46, 2 Kgs 23:7, Job 36:4, Hos 4:14)²⁰. During the 2nd and early 1st millennia BCE we find evidence of sacred sex practices by the cultures that would have impacted the growing Jewish nation. Such an impact can be seen in the commands attributed to Yhvh to banish the vdq from the land and to avoid all of their non-Israelite practices. Placing the prohibitions on same-gender sex, as found in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, into the context of sacred/ritualized sex, becomes a distinct possibility in light of the surrounding cultures²¹.

One possible link to the vdq mentioned in the Jewish Testament and the assinu of the goddesses is the reference in Dt 23:17-18 to "dogs": "No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute (vdq). You must not bring the earnings of a female prostitute (hnz) or of a male prostitute (blk, or 'dog') into the house of the Lord your God to pay any vow, because the Lord your God detests them both." In this text, the author seems to be using the word 'dog' in a derogatory sense, in the same way we tend to today when using it to refer to a person. However, the derogatory sense of 'dog' was not universal at the time. It often was used in reference to the faithfulness of a trusted and loyal servant. Thomas notes the promise of Abdi-Asratu to Pharaoh: "I am the servant of the king, and the dog of his house", calling himself "Pharaoh's faithful watch-dog"²². The term for 'dog' used here is kalbu, similar to the title of the goddess priests, the kalu, as discussed above, and could also be compounded with the title of a god to show priestly servitude to that god: "Kalbi-Sin, Kalbi-Samas, Kalbi-Marduk"²³. Thomas goes on to mention, "At the temple of Astarte at Kition in Cyprus there were cultic persons, temple servants, who were called klbm"²⁴. Moreover, another ancient term for a sexual-variant priest, assinu, "joins the [Sumerogram] symbols for 'dog' and 'woman'"²⁵.

It is possible that the Christian Testament carries this same theme into the Greek language. Both Paul and John talk about 'dogs' in the sense of an evil person. John, in Revelation 22:15, lists those who will be left outside the gates of the city: "The dogs (kuneV), those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood." Similarly Paul, in Philippians gives a reference to 'dogs' which is traditionally interpreted as referring to Jews because of the subsequent discussion of circumcision, but may possibly be referring to the castration aspect of the goddess religions: "Watch out for those dogs, those men who do evil, those mutilators of the flesh. For it is we who are the circumcision, we who worship by the Spirit of God, who glory in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh"²⁶. Given the prevalence of the goddess religions in the Greco-Roman world, and the precedent set by the language of the Jewish Testament and the surrounding cultures, it is possible that these references are describing the galli, the gender/sexually-variant priests of the goddess religions described below.

Finally, the association between idolatry, pagan rituals and wicked sexual practices was far from uncommon in the Jewish mind. As we have seen, the Jewish Testament has several specific references to male homosexual prostitutes in conjunction with non-Israelite worship. In an inter-testamental Jewish work, the Wisdom of Solomon, we find an association that is almost identical to that made by Paul in Romans 1, clarifying the literary and Judaic background from which Paul may have been writing. As will be shown, several of the specific ritual references described in this passage can be seen in pagan goddess rituals.

As evidenced by this passage, the association between sexual immorality and pagan rituals seems clear in the mind of the Jewish author. But just as sexual immorality in general was not limited to the ritual context, neither was homosexuality limited to the ritual context. So while I will spend the rest of this paper showing that Paul's most likely intent for Romans 1:26-27 was to condemn ritual sexual practices, I should briefly mention non-ritualistic homogenital behavior in the Greco-Roman world.

There has been much debate regarding the types of homosexuality to which Paul would have been exposed. Some have argued that Paul would only have known about pederasty²⁷, others have argued that Paul's primary knowledge was of homosexual prostitution²⁸, while others have argued that Paul would have been exposed to a much broader range of homosexualities²⁹. Smith provides a good survey of the types of homosexualities for which we have evidence during the Greco-Roman era. Larger treatises have dealt extensively with the issue of Greco-Roman homosexualities, so I will not explore it in this paper. ³⁰ Suffice it to say that Paul may have been aware of several types of homosexualities: ritualistic homogenitality, pederasty, homosexual prostitution, master-slave relationships, mutually consenting gay/lesbian relationships and possibly even marriage-like gay/lesbian relationships.

Regardless of the types of homosexualities known to Paul, it is my contention that Paul is specifically addressing ritual homogenitality in the context of Romans 1. Other authors have addressed Paul's intended meaning for arsenokoites and malakos in 1 Co 6:9 and 1 Tim 1:9-10.³¹ Whether or not those references are to male prostitutes, to sexually assaultive practices or represent a juxtaposition between passive and active sexual partners sheds little light on the issue at hand: Paul's intent for Romans 1:26-27. Regardless of Paul's view of general homogenital contact, I will attempt to show in this paper that the context of Romans 1 limits the homogenital reference in 1.27 to the ritual context and should not be extended to the many other types of homosexualities to which Paul may have been exposed.

II. Paul Versus the Goddess Religions

The goddess religions were very popular in the Greco-Roman era. During the time of Paul's missionary travels, the goddess religions were having a wide resurgence. Temples dedicated to Cybele/Attis, Artemis, Aphrodite, Demeter and Venus were scattered throughout most cities of the region. The temple to Artemis in Ephesus was the largest building in the world at the time and one of the Seven Wonders of the World.32 The temple to Aphrodite in Corinth was conjectured to have had more than 1,000 temple prostitutes.³³ In Rome, the Cybele/Attis temple was built in the heart of the city on one of the Seven Hills of Rome, and the Roman temple to Aphrodite was on another of these hills, the Capitolene.³⁴ The official sanctions that had prevented citizens from fully participating in the priestly rituals were lifted in the mid-first century CE.³⁵ In addition, Cybele's image was printed on Roman coinage and two major city-festivals, the Day of Blood and the Megalensia, were organized around Cybele and Attis. A statue of Cybele presided over most of the public games.³⁶ It is my belief that the popularity and power of the goddess religions during the time of Paul's ministry gave him a readily available target to use in his description of people who fall away from God.

The religion of the mother goddess, the Great Mother (Magna Mater), dates at least as far back as 6000 BCE. A terracotta figurine from this era, found at Catal Huyuk, near modern-day Konia, Turkey, shows the Mother in a classic pose, sitting on her throne between two large cats.³⁷ Her religion had taken root in Asia Minor by at least the seventh century BCE,³⁸ in Greece by the 5th³⁹ or early 4th century,⁴⁰ and her official entry into Rome was on April 6, 204 BCE.⁴¹ In 191 BC, Cybele's temple on Palatine Hill was completed,⁴² was burned down in 111 BCE and soon rebuilt, then again burned and was rebuilt around 3 CE under Augustus. This structure remained in use until the 5th century CE.⁴³

Cybele's consort, Attis, has several different legends attached to his name. Arnobius provides a Roman version, by way of the Greek Timotheus. The retelling of this legend shows us many specific and metaphorical practices that were carried out in the goddess rituals..

Several aspects of Cybele and Attis can be observed from this passage, which help us understand the rituals absorbed by their followers. First, the immaculate nature of Acdestis' birth is indicative of the sexual stature of Cybele. While she is the mother of the gods, she is also virginal. In some versions of the myth, Cybele herself is Attis' mother, being replaced for Nana above (Livy, Ovid). In some versions, Attis, the shepherd, is Cybele's beloved, but they never consummate their relationship sexually, due to Attis' emasculation.⁴⁴ The female priests of several goddesses mimic this part of the myth in their method of sacred sexuality in the temple: they give their bodies as sexual implements to the worshippers, but only in ways which prevent pregnancy, thus maintaining their understanding of virginity, which could be a link to Paul's heterogenital reference of non-procreative sex in Romans 1:26b.

A second aspect of this story is Acdestis' hermaphroditic character, his extreme emotional passion merging with sexual and violent instability, and his subsequent emasculation. In some versions of the story Acdestis has the capacity to produce offspring asexually. His hermaphroditic nature was expressed both as anatomical duality, as well as prolific bisexual behavior. The galli (priests of Attis) saw this as a transcendence of gender by Acdestis, encompassing both sexual/gender natures in one person. Attis and Cybele, along with several other gods and goddesses exhibited sexual-variant and transgender behavior. Many of the goddess rituals exhibit an attempt to transcend gender, incorporating sacred sexuality, transgender behaviors, and transsexualism into their religions.⁴⁵

It is Acdestis' transgender nature that causes such fear among the other gods, leading them to rule that one of his genders, if not both, must be removed. However, even after Acdestis' masculine genitalia are removed, he still retains his sexuality and his capacity to love in his relationship with Attis. In fact, when his relationship with Attis is threatened by outside intervention, Acdestis induces a Bacchalic mania in the wedding party, including in Attis. In some versions of the story it is Cybele's jealousy that induces the mania.⁴⁶ This mania represents the third characteristic of the story that is important in understanding the Cybele/Attis religions. In an imitation of Attis' frenzy, the priests of Attis, the galli, use music, dance, and knives/swords to whip themselves into a bloody frenzy, ending with the violent act of self-emasculation.

It was these public and spectacular images of the galli that would have provided Paul with the vivid imagery of goddess worship and sexual idiosyncrasies that his readers would immediately have recognized in Romans 1. The extent of the worship of Cybele and Attis in Greco-Roman culture should not be underestimated. Fear notes that while "mystery religions in general were not a focus of Christian polemic, Attis and Cybele on the other hand appear to have been a favorite target for the invective of Christian writers."⁴⁷ Roller describes the worship of Cybele as central to Roman life:⁴⁸

There is a great similarity in the practice of worship among several of the goddesses, sometimes causing a blurring of naming and awareness of the specific identity of the goddess being or even lumping various goddesses into one group. ⁴⁹ The worship of a mother goddess by gender-variant priests goes back at least as far as the Sumerians in the 3rd millennium BCE,⁵⁰ and appears in temple records as the gala/kalu priest in relation to the goddess Innana. Homogenital activity in their rituals seems clear from the following epithet: "When the kalum-priest [gala] wiped his anus (he said), 'I must not excite that which belongs to my lady Innana!'"⁵¹ Gordon goes on to say that this reference is "Probably a derisive allusion to the kalum-priest's rols as a sacred catamite . . . in the service of the goddess of love and fertility, Inanna." Further, the Sumerian word-sign for gala is the two signs for penis+ anus (GIS.DUR).⁵²

Their sexual function and cross-gender behavior of the galli was similar to the gala of Innana. Ancient material shows that the assinitu were discussed in the context of Ishtar's female priests (harimtu, kezertu, sekretu, samhatu), who were expected to engage in sexual acts with worshipers, but not become pregnant; they were consecrated to the goddess as naditu, or 'barren'.⁵³ It would seem, therefore, that anal sex was the form of sex practiced by these priests, both female and male. Laws that outlawed homogenital behavior in the temple may have caused part of the male cross-gender behavior and emasculation. Therefore, if the male priests wanted to continue to serve their goddess, they had to "become" women.⁵⁴ This, again, was a vivid image of ritual sexual idolatry that would have provided Paul's readers with the historical and cultural background to associate the Romans 1:27 sexual reference with a strict discussion of goddess worship and pagan idolatry.

2. Galli

Like the other goddess priests, the Cybele/Attis priests engaged in cross-gender behaviors. Many sources describe their cross-dressing and effeminate image,55 as well as the annual-festival of the galli. The Romans had difficulty accepting the gender-variant nature of the galli's activities, and Roman citizens were prohibited from becoming galli, primarily because of their repulsion of emasculation. However, in 101 BCE, the laws were altered to allow certain citizens to become galli, and "between 41 and 54 CE, the emperor Claudius removed all restrictions preventing citizens from becoming galli."⁵⁶ Eventually, the head of the galli, the Archgallus, became a state-appointed position.⁵⁷

During their annual festival, the Day of Blood, the galli would wander around in the streets in full cross-dress: amulets, flowing robes, make-up, depilated bodies and long hair dyed blond. They would dance around in a frenzy with tambourines and flutes, often with knives or swords, with which they would cut their arms, letting blood to help them tell fortunes for the people who would give them money.⁵⁸ In both the Greek and Roman sources, gender-variant, frenzied and orgiastic festival behaviors are described, continuing at least up to the 4th century CE. Most of the Christian invectives focus on their gender-variant sexual behaviors, as encompassed in the pagan rituals. Firmicus describes their behavior as follows (while Firmicus represents a later source, Juvenal and Lucretian of the 1st and 2nd centuries give similar accounts, among many others⁵⁹), using language reminiscent of Paul's attacks in Romans 1:

Following the legend of the self-emasculation of Acdestis and Attis' comes the imitation of self-emasculation by the galli. There is significant evidence that males made themselves into eunuchs⁶⁰ and that it was an essential aspect to their religion.⁶¹ Such ministerial eunuchism has been a common practice in many of the goddess rituals throughout history.

The act of self-emasculation had several purposes, one of which was that it helped the gallus transcend gender altogether, as described by one faction of the Gnostic movement, the Naassenes, a group that Kroeger links to the first century CE.⁶² They believed that, "while equally regarding the Logos as the centre of their belief, held the equivalent deity to be Attis, and frequented the Phrygian Mysteries as the most direct source of spiritual enlightenment."⁶³ Kroeger continues this thought, stating, "There is considerable evidence that the Naassene sect developed from that of Attis of Cybele."⁶⁴ Hippolytus, a Christian apologist from the late 2nd century CE, attacks the Naassenes beliefs about hermaphroditism. The following quote from a Naassene text exhibits this belief: "When you make the male and female one and the same, so that the male not be male nor the female... then you will enter the Kingdom."⁶⁵ It is this and other teachings that Hippolytus directly assaults and in the process links the Cybele/Rhea and Attis religion to Romans 1:

In Romans 1, what most Christians today see as a condemnation on same-sex sexual behavior, the Naassenes saw as a blessing on such behavior, in as much as it helped them to transcend gender, and thus become closer to God. In this text we have a link between the mindset of a subset of the early church and the context of Rom 1:26-27. We clearly see that the Naassenes, at least, viewed the context of Paul's intent for the description of the sexual activity in Romans 1 as sacred sexuality, connected directly with the sexual rituals of the galli and the Attic religion.

B. Homogenitality, Female Galli and Phalli

Many religions have made sex an integral part of their worship.66 We see as much in the Jewish Testament references to vdq, translated "male shrine prostitutes". That Scripture recognizes and condemns sacred sex is clear. That Greek and Roman society condemned sacred sex, even sacred homogenitality, is far from clear and is probably mistaken. In fact, it seems that ritualized pagan homoeroticism "experienced a kind of renaissance between the fourth century BCE and the third century CE." ⁶⁷ In this form of worship the worshiper "receives the inner-most essence and power of a god," while the galli live out the sexual/gender variance of Attis and Cybele (Arnobius, Adversus Gentes 5.6), as well as transcend gender, to become more like their gods.

The images of the galli we have from Roman and Greek texts clearly show persons who engage in homogenital activity. Clement of Alexandria quotes part of the initiation rite used by new devotees to Attis: "I have eaten out of the drum, I have drunk out of the cymbal, I have carried the Cernos, I have plunged into the marriage bed." (Protreptikos, 2.14, my translation ) Earlier, we saw a similarly sexual reference by Firmicus Maternus, "men letting themselves be handled as women, and flaunting with boastful ostentatiousness this ignominy of their impure and unchaste bodies."⁶⁸

However, while the "image" of the galli may have been primarily of having sex only with males, that image did not necessarily play out in their "sexual preference,"⁶⁹ as we see in an epigram by Martial:

In addition to the gender-variant males, we see female galli, known as melissea ('bees'), ierodoulouV ('temple prostitutes') or sacerdos ('priestess'), associated with the mother goddess. Vermaseren notes that⁷⁰

Sawyer concurs with this thought: "Women in particular would have enjoyed the freedom that such a religion offered them as an alternative to the rigid, patriarchal structures Roman society imposed on them."⁷¹ Showerman notes, "The ministers of ordinary rank were sometimes men, sometimes women, the former being the castrated Galli."⁷²

Roller describes a Greek text from Lesbos on the modesty of women, excluding access to a sacred temenoV from certain persons: "women who have recently given birth, Galli, and women who gallazein--that is, hold Gallic rites to Meter."⁷³ Aphrodite, the patron of both ierodoulouV and secular prostitutes,⁷⁴ had female practitioners of these roles closely associated with her temples. As we have already seen, ierodoulouV were associated with the temples of Aphrodite/Venus in Rome,⁷⁵ as well as both ierodoulouV and courtesans with the temple of Artemis in Ephesus (Strabo, Geography 8.6.20). The rituals associated with these temples were often orgiastic, and "their votaries were women and eunuchs."⁷⁶ Juvenal, as quoted above, describes the whorish image of the priestesses and practices in the temple of Cybele (Satire 6.315ff).

Clement of Alexandria similarly describes the practices of some of the female galli, pairing them with these stereotyped images of the male galli that we have discussed:

In addition to showing the presence of female galli, Clement also brings up an issue that would ordinarily seem unlikely: the women were having sex with the effeminate men, the kinaideV. These may or may not have been the male galli--the text does not allow us to draw a conclusion either way. Regardless of whether these kinaideV?were galli, it begs the question of why a kinaidoV would go to a female to have sex, and what form that sex would take. The most parsimonious answer is that the women were using artificial phalli to perform anal sex on the men, as described below in other Graeco-Roman sources, which could easily be applied to Rom 1:26 to help us understand the context for interpreting the behavior described by Paul as heterosexual.

This interpretation of the behavior of the temple ierodule is supported by several texts that associate the goddess temples with artificial phalli. The goddess Diana was honored in the kordax: "a dance-drama in which women and men dressed in the garments of the opposite sex, the women, wearing lombai, 'enormous phalli,' pretended to penetrate the male dancers."⁷⁷ In another text by Clement, he mentions the galli of Aphrodite, who give a phallus to the initiates: "Of members so lewd a worthy fruit--Aphrodite--is born. In the rites which celebrate this enjoyment of the sea, as a symbol of her birth a lump of suit and the phallus are handed to those who are initiated into the art of uncleanness." (Protreptikos 2.14)

Similarly, in a much later text, Arnobius describes a belief regarding the galli of Venus: "Those hidden mysteries of Cyprian Venus we pass by also, whose founder is said to have been King Cinyras, in which being initiated, they bring stated fees as to a harlot, and carry away phalli, given as signs of the propitious deity." (Adversus Gentes 19) While neither of these texts explicitly states the use of phalli by women on the men, nor do they state that phalli are used in the rituals, the association of the phalli in the context of the rituals, given the known practices of the gala/kalu, is certainly indicative of their ultimate use. Regardless, assuming the phalli are used in some kind of heterosexual acts (or female homogenital acts) or if Clement's reference in Paedagogos indicates oral heterosexual intercourse, the application to Rom 1:26 is no less valid.

C. Animal Imagery

Cybele's association with the great cats, especially lions, has already been mentioned, and her association with other four-footed animals, especially deer, is not uncommon.78 Birds are one of the primary images of the galli. In fact, the word gallus is the Latin term for 'rooster/cock' and galli are often pictured with roosters in reliefs from Attis temples. Lucian provides a second avian association (De Dea Syria 54), describing doves as holy to galli who would refrain from shooing them away and thus their temples and houses were filled with the doves.

The snake is the third form of animal commonly found in images of Cybele and Attis. The Naasenes, who were closely related to Attis worship in their theology, highly valued the snake in their worship. In fact, Kroeger notes the following, "Hippolytus says about the Naasenes: that they worshiped nothing except the serpent."⁷⁹ Further, galli themselves were known to use snakes directly in their worship, "We shall pass by the wild Bacchanalia, ... with seeming frenzy and the loss of your senses you twine snakes about you; and, to show yourselves full of the divinity and majesty of the god, tear in pieces with gory mouths the flesh of loudly-bleating goats." (Arnobius, Adversus Gentes 17. This passage immediately follows the lengthy passage cited above which described the Cybele/Attis myth)

The snake association is supported by the numerous serpentine images associated with both Cybele and directly with the galli: a stele showing Cybele flanked by serpents;⁸⁰ a relief with a bust of Attis and an archgallus (the head of the area galli), shows the archgallus wearing a band with a clasp formed by two serpent head joined by a ring, which was worn as a necklace;⁸¹ a sarcophagus lid found at the Portus Romae, shows an archgallus reclining with a snake lying near his feet;⁸² numerous examples are found in Vermaseren's CCCA series.⁸³

Finally, in a tile mosaic image dedicated to Cybele and Attis in the Basilica Hilariana in Rome (2nd century CE.), we see a range of animals depicted: a raven, a dove, a snake, and six other animals.⁸⁴ Given the visual description of animal images in Romans 1:23, this mosaic supports the possibility that Paul was attempting to draw a specific association between Cybele worship and his condemnations in Romans 1.

3. Early Christians, the Bible, and the Mother Goddess

That Paul would have been familiar with the goddess religions seems inescapable. Temples and shrines to Cybele, Artemis, Venus/Aphrodite, Astarte, and others were scattered densely around the region of Paul's upbringing and missionary travels (Asia Minor, Greece, Cyprus, etc.). In Corinth, where Paul was most likely staying when he wrote the epistle to the Romans, several gender/sexual-variant artifacts have been found. Vermaseren85describes the area surrounding Corinth, by way of Pausanias, who "carefully indicates the shrines along the road to the famous sanctuary to Aphrodite: 'First there were two shrines of Isis and two more of Serapis; then there were altars of Helios and a sanctuary of Ananke and Bia. Above this there stood a temple of the Mother of the Gods with a stele and a marble throne.' ... Several Cybele representations from Corinth are already known." Kroeger describes a vase painting of a woman "dressed in Satyr pants equipped with a male organ."⁸⁶ For an exhaustive description of the extant artifacts representing Cybele and Attis, Vermaseren's CCCA catalogues such findings.⁸⁷

There can be little disagreement that the early Christians were concerned about the competing religions. Many texts that we have from Christians of the first few centuries represent documents explaining the deficits and evils of the other religions. The many texts quoted above attest to the fact that not only were the church fathers aware of the goddess religions, but were confronted with them to the extent that they dedicated several specific attacks on them in their writings. This isn't surprising, given the popularity and influence of the religions on the Greek and Roman cultures. Roller notes the extent of the galli's presence in Rome:⁸⁸

How much the Christians and the galli actually interacted in the first century is not known. But given the polemics against the galli by later Christian writers, and the growing competition politically between the followers of Cybele and of Christ as Christianity became better accepted in the Empire, it is clear that there were major disputes between the two groups. Roscoe goes as far as saying, "In some cities, worshipers clashed in the streets when the festivals of the two religions coincided, as they often did in the spring."⁸⁹ Several theological similarities between the two religions may have exacerbated the tensions: Cybele as a virgin, Attis' father as Zeus--the supreme deity, Attis' resurrection from the dead and the similar timing of the resurrection celebrations. The Attis winter solstice festival was eventually redefined as Christmas, in order to de-paganize the national celebration.

Aphrodite/Venus was known to have had sexualized and gender-variant rituals incorporated into her worship. Macrobius clearly describes the cross-dressing behavior of the worshipers, as well as the gender-variant characteristics of Venus/Aphrodite him/herself. The sexualization of the rituals, and the popularity of these religions are clearly attested. Strabo describes the influence of Aphrodite in Corinth, written just several decades prior to Paul's missionary activity there: "And the temple of Aphrodite was so rich that it owned more than a thousand temple-slaves (ierodoulouV), courtesans, whom both men and women had dedicated to the goddess. And therefore it was also on account of these women that the city was crowded with people and grew rich." (Geography 8.6.20)

While the historicity of two Christian apologists, Clement of Alexandria and Firmicus Maternus, is questionable, they do show what the early church apparently believed about these religions, which is important when trying to understand Paul's polemics against them. Clement's understanding of the Aphrodite rituals involved the exchange of a phallus, which, when paired with Macrobius' hermaphroditic understanding of the goddesses, seems to indicate a type of female-female penetrative sexuality, or reversed-role heterosexual penetration. Such reversed-role penetrative acts are found in ancient sources, as discussed below. Clement of Alexandria gives us insight into the sexual nature of the religion: "Of members so lewd a worthy fruit--Aphrodite--is born. In the rites which celebrate this enjoyment of the sea, as a symbol of her birth a lump of suit and the phallus are handed to those who are initiated into the art of uncleanness. And those initiated bring a piece of money to her, as a courtesan's paramours do to her." (Protreptikos, 2.14)

Finally, the slightly more subtle Firmicus Maternus echoes similar disdain for the apparent prostitutory nature of the Venusian temple:

Artemis is another goddess with great similarities to Cybele in worship, history and ideology.⁹⁰ She was often represented in polymastic form, flanked by animals, especially deer.⁹¹ Like the galli of Cybele, the male priests of Artemis were self-emasculated eunuchs.⁹² As noted above, Artemis' temple in Ephesus was the largest building in the world and we get a clear view of the economic, political and social power of Artemis in Paul's encounter with her followers in Acts 19: after a silversmith convinces his fellow-tradesmen that Paul's preaching poses a significant risk to the their trade and that Paul is discrediting the name of Artemis, they start a riot, shouting "Great is Artemis" (19:28, 34), and refuse to be dissuaded. Eventually, the city-clerk exclaims, "Men of Ephesus, doesn't all the world know that the city of Ephesus is the guardian of the temple of the great Artemis and of her image, which fell from heaven?" (19:35).

The evidence shows the threat that goddess religions posed to early Christianity, which would certainly have been understood by Paul. As we have seen, Paul had been exposed to these religions and their practices, and his ministry was at times severely compromised by them as evidenced in the Acts 19 passage after his teachings against Artemis. It is from this perspective that we should view Paul's writings.

III. Conclusion

The traditional interpretation of this passage leaves several questions unanswered. One problem is the nature of the rhetorical structure of 1:18-32, which has been a continuing source of controversy. Another problem, more theological in nature, is that if Paul is not referring to goddess worship in this passage, then why does he focus so much attention on homosexuality? He goes to the trouble of describing the sexual behaviors in detail, differentiating gender, putting them at the very head of the sin-list and then emphasizes the issue further by separating it from the other sins. The question of motivation, then, is why would Paul bury murder and God-hating in a mere list, while highlighting homogenitality, which is condemned at most three times in the Jewish Testament. Within the rabbinical tradition, from which Paul would have been trained, there is vanishingly little mention of either male or female homogenitality.93 The question of whether Paul would elevate the sin of homosexuality above the other sins listed in Rom 1:29-30, as is implied with the traditional interpretation of this passage, leads to doubt regarding the validity of this interpretation.

A more parsimonious explanation is that the reference to male homogenitality and female homo/heterogenitality in this passage is a condemnation of pagan sacred-sex practices. This view is strengthened by the earlier quote from Hippolytus (Refutation of All Heresies, Book V) that ties at least one part of the early church to the belief that this text was a reference to Cybele/Attis worship, and that the Christian Testament itself attests that Paul's ministry was, at least during certain times, strongly hindered by the goddess cults. Moreover, if the reference from the Apocalypse of Peter is accurately ascribed to the Cybele religion, it not only confirms that the early church paired male homogenitality with heterosexual non-procreative sex acts in its thinking, but it may also indicate an inherent pairing of Romans 1 with Cybele/Attis worship, in the mind of the early church, given the similarity between the Apocalypse and Romans passages.

These early church and exegetical references, together with the fact that the structural and cultural references to idolatry in Romans 1 evoke clear images of the Cybele/Attis religion, give us strong reason to believe that the primary context for Paul's discussion in this passage is specifically the goddess religions. His intended attack is against the sacred-sex practices of goddess worship and pagan idolatry. The Romans 1:26-27 reference, which has traditionally been interpreted to condemn general male and female homosexual behavior, therefore has no bearing on that issue. Rather, the point of Paul's reference is to evoke vivid and commonly held images of cultic practices and subsequently to condemn those practices which lead one to the worship of false gods.

2 J. E. Miller, "The Practices of Romans 1:26: Homosexual or Heterosexual." NovT 37 (1995) 1-11.

3 Brooten, Love, 337, citing Scholion to Paidagogos 2.10.8.6.3

4 W. Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha, v 2. Philadelphia, pg. 676-77: Westminster, 1964. For more discussion, see also M. R. James, The Journal of Theological Studies (1911): 36-54, 157, 362-383, 573-583.

5 Brooten, Love, 247. R. Ward, "Why unnatural? The Tradition Behind Romans 1:26-27," HTR 90 (1997) 263-284. J. DeYoung, "The Meaning of Nature in Romans 1 and its Implications for Biblical Proscriptions of Homosexual Behavior," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 31 (1988) 429-41.

6 Ironically (in light of the heated debates in the contemporary church regarding homosexuality) we see in the Romans 11 passage that God shocks the believers of the day by acting para fusin, grafting in those people, based merely on their faith, who were previously thought to be ungraftable. Eugene Rogers (Sexuality and the Christian Body. Blackwell Pub, 1999) describes this ironic duplication of the phrase para fusin, hypothesizing that even if the Jewish and Christian Testaments do condemn homosexuality, God seems to be in the business of grafting in faithful believers whose lives evidence love for God and love for one's neighbor. See also F Gaiser. "A new word on homosexuality? Isaiah 56:1-8 as case study." Word and World 14 (1994): 280-293. CL Seow, "A Heterosexual Perspective," Homosexuality and Christian Community. ed. CL Seow nity, (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1996).

7 N. W. Lund, Chiasmus in the New Testament (Peabody: Hendrickson Pub) 1942. J. W. Welch, ed, Chiasmus in Antiquity: Structures, Analyses, Exegesis. (Gersenberg: Verlag) 1981.

8 D. Moo, Romans 1-8 (Chicago: Moody) 1991.

9 met/yllaxan--which means a substitution of one thing in place of another

10 paradwken--refers to God allowing the natural course of events to occur from the behavior initiated by the Gentiles--God didn't "cause" them to have the "sinful desires" (v. 24), "shameful lusts" (v. 26a) or "depraved mind" (v. 28), but when the Gentiles abandoned God, paradwken implies that God stepped back and allowed the natural course of events to happen.

11 DeYoung, JETS 166. See also B. S. Rosner., "Temple Prostitution in 1 Corinthians 6:12-20." NT 40 (1998): 336-51. Rosner argues against the Greco-Roman existence of "sacred sex", which would be ritualized to worship a deity, in favor of merely "temple prostitution", the centralizing of prostitution in pagan temples. Even if Rosner is correct in his assessment, it is clear that Paul and his audience would associate sexual immorality, including homosexual prostitution, with pagan temples.

12 The use of 'sin lists' was common in Paul and other early church writers. See D. Aune, The New Testament in Its Literary Environment. Library of Early Christianity, v. 8, pg. 191-196. Philadelphia: Westminster , 1987.

13 Rosner believes that 1 Co 6:12-20 is a specific condemnation of temple prostitution. Rosner, "Temple Prostitution," NT.

14 W. D. Chamberlain, An Exegetical Grammar of the Greek New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House), 1941 (reprinted 1987).

15 see also E. Kasemann, Commentary on Romans, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans) 1980. J.A. Fitzmeyer, Romans (New York: Doubleday) 1993.

16 Chamberlain, Exegetical.

17 Ibid, 106

18 My own paraphrase.

19 Again, see Rosner, "Temple Prostitution," NT.

20See P. A. Bird, "The End of the Male Cult Prostitute: A Literary-Historical and Sociological Analysis of Hebrew QADES-QEDESIM." Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 66 (1995): 37-80. Also cited as Congress Volume, New York: Brill, 1997. While Bird rejects the idea of homosexual prostitution in relation to the fertility cults, she does provide evidence for homosexual practices related to pagan temples as well as evidence for emasculation of the men serving in the sexual capacities.

21 L. Scanzoni and V. Molenkott. Is the Homosexual My Neighbor? San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1994. T. Horner, Jonathan Loved David: Homosexuality in Biblical Times (Philadelphia: Westminster), 1978.

22 T. D. Winton, "Kelebh 'Dog': Its Origin and Some Usages of it in the Old Testament." Vetus Testamentum 10 (1960) 410-427. See 424.

23 Ibid, 425

24 Ibid, 425

25 D. Greenberg, The Construction of Homosexuality (University of Chicago) London, 1988, 95; Thomas, 426. See also M. Nissinen, Homoeroticism in the Biblical World: A Historical Perspective, (Minneapolis: Fortress) 1998, 41.

26 Phlp 3:2-3. See discussion in T. Schmidt, Straight & Narrow? Compassion and Clarity in the Homosexuality Debate. InterVarsity: Downers Grove, 1995, 97-98.

27 R. Scroggs, New Testament and Homosexuality (New York: Oxford University ), 1999.

28 J. Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality : Gay People in Western Europe from the Beginning of the Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century (Chicago: Univ of Chicago Pr), 1981.

29 M. Smith, "Ancient Bisexuality and the interpretation of Romans 1:26-27." JAAR 64 (1996): 223-256).

30 Brooten, Love. Cantarella, Bisexuality. Williams, Roman. K Dover, Greek Homosexuality. (Harvard University), 1989.

31D. Martin, "Arsenokoites and malakos: Meanings and Consequences." in R. Brawley, Biblical Ethics and Homosexuality. Westminster : Louisville, 1996. W. Petersen, "Can arsenokoitai be translated by homosexuals?" Vigiliae Christianae 40 (1986): 187-91. W. Petersen, "On the study of homosexuality in Patristic sources." Studia Patristica 20 (1989): 283-88.

32 Horner, Jonathan, 100

33 Strabo, Geography 8.6.20. Strabo's reference is, granted, long before Paul's time and it is doubtful that during Paul's ministry the Corinthian temple to Artemis had the extent of ritual sexuality ascribed by Strabo. But the verbal history surrounding the temple and the continued economic and social power of the followers of Artemis during Paul's ministry is well-established.

34 E. Stehle, "Venus, Cybele, and the Sabine Women: The Roman Construction of Female Sexuality," Helios 16 (1989) 143-164.

35 R. P. Conner, Blossom of Bone: Reclaiming the Connections between Homoeroticism and the Sacred (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco) 1993, 102.

36 M. J. Vermaseren, Cybele and Attis: The Myth and the Cult (London: Thames and Hudson) 1977, 96

37 Vermaseren, Cybele, 15. R. Turcan, Les Religions De L'Asie Dans La Vallee Du Rhone (Leiden: E. J. Brill) 1972, 28.

38 Vermaseren, Cybele, 20. E. Lane, ed., Cybele, Attis and Related Cults: Essays in Memory of M. J. Vermaseren (New York: E. J. Brill) 1996, 101.

39 Vermaseren, Cybele, 32

40 G. S. Gasparro, Soteriology and Mystic Aspects in the Cult of Cybele and Attis (Leiden: E. J. Brill) 1985, 64. L. H. Martin, Hellenistic Religions, (New York: Oxford University ) 1987, 83.

41 Stehle, Helios, 153; Vermaseren, Cybele, 41

42 R. Turcan, The Cults of the Roman Empire (Cambridge: Blackwell), 1996, 37. Vermaseren, Cybele, 41

43 Vermaseren, Cybele, 43

44 Vermaseren, Corpus (1966), 13

45 Bird, "Male Cult Protitute," VT.

46 Vermaseren, Corpus (1966), 31

47 Lane, Cybele, 37

48 Roller, Search, 315-16

49 Greenberg, Construction, 98. C. Kroeger, "The Apostle Paul and the Greco-Roman Cults of Women," JETS 30 (1987) 25-38. J. G. Frazer, Adonis, Attis, Osiris: Studies in the History of Oriental Religion, (New York: University Books) 1961, 269. W. M. B. Tyrrell, Amazons: A Study in Athenian Mythmaking (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University) 1984, 86. Gasparro, Soteriology, 40. C. Olson, ed. The Book of the Goddess Past and Present (New York: Crossroad) 1983, 60. See also Macrobius, Saturnalia, 3.8.2-3; Lucian, The Golden Ass, 47; Stehle, Helios, 152.

50 W. Roscoe, "Priests of the Goddess: Gender Transgression in Ancient Religion." History of Religions 35 (1996): 195-230. (213). Nissinen, 33.

51 E. Gordon, Sumerian Proverbs: Glimpses of Everyday Life in Ancient Mesopotamia. Philadelphia: University Museum, 1959, 248-249.

52 Roscoe, HR, 214

53 Greenberg, Construction, 106. D. J. Wold, Out of Order (Baker Books: Grand Rapids) 1998, 60.

54 B. Thorbjornsrud, "What Can the Gilgamesh Myth Tell us about Religion and the View of Humanity in Mesopotamia?" Temenos 19 (1983) 112-137. Nissinen, 29-30.

55 Martin, Hellenistic, 84

56 Connor, Blossom, 102

57 Showerman, Great, 51

58 Vermaseren, Cybele, 97; Turcan, Cults, 37-41; Greenberg, Construction, 98; Frazer, Adonis, 268. R. Kroeger and C. Kroeger. I Suffer Not a Woman: Rethinking 1 Timothy 2:11-15 in Light of Ancient Evidence (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House) 1991, 94.

59 See also Lucretius, The Nature of Things, 2.611; Juvenal, Satire 6.315ff ; Catullus 63; Clement of Alexandria, Protreptikos 2.14 and Paedagogo 3.4; Philostratus, Vita Apollonii Tyanensis 4.21; Lucian, De Dea Syria, 50-5; Augustine, City of God, 6.7.

60 Lucian, De Dea Syria, 51; Catullus 63; Juvenal, Satire 6.500

61 Roller, Search, 318

62 Kroeger, Suffer, 165

63 J. L. Weston, From Ritual to Romance (Mineola: Dover) 1997, 158

64 Kroeger, Suffer, 166

65 Roscoe, HR, 204

66 Greenberg, Construction, 99

67 Connor, Blossom, 116

68 The Error of Pagan Religions, 4.2; see also Lucian, The Golden Ass 35, 36, 38

69 If such a concept is even valid for the Greeks and Romans.

70 Vermaseren, Cybele, 109.

71 Sawyer, Women, 125

72 G. Showerman, The Great Mother of the Gods (Chicago: Argonaut) 1901, 54

73 Roller, Search.

74 Connor, Blossom, 91

75 Stehle, Helios, 152

76 Tyrrell, Amazons, 86

77 Connor, Blossom, 96

78 Turcan, Cults, 28

79 Kroeger, Suffer, 166

80 Kroeger, Suffer, 156

81 Showerman, Great, 53

82 Gasparro, Soteriology, 75

83 Vermaseren, in his seven volume series on Cybele/Attis images, has photographed and described numerous depictions of one or both of the gods with snakes: CCCA II 1982, p. 132, 116, 117; CCCA III 1977, p. 42, 82, 114, 116, 123, 140; CCA IV 1978, p. 20, 27, 107; CCCA V 1986, p. 45, 109, 148; CCCA VII 1977, p. 14, 28; two other works show Cybele and/or Attis with snakes: Turcan, Cults, Plate II, III, VII; Lane, Cybele, 138-140, 143, 148, 157.

84 MJ Vermaseren 1977, Corpus Cultus Cybelae Attidisque (Leiden: E. J. Brill) 42, #210.

85 Vermaseren, Cybele, 37.

86 Kroeger, JETS, 37

87 Vermaseren, Corpus.

88 Roller, Search, 319

89 Roscoe, HR, 205

90 Vermaseren, Cybele, 30; Kroeger, Suffer, 188

91 Turcan, Cults, 28

92 Tyrell, Amazons, 86; Kroeger, JETS, 37; Frazer, Adonis, 269; Roscoe, HR, 217; Bird, VT, 41.

93 B. Artsun, "Judaism and Homosexuality," Tikkun 3 (1988) 52-54+

Feel free to e-mail me at webmail@jeramyt.org

"Open your eyes. Don't let your mind tell the story here." Tonic, 1996